These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Buff Lo and Null

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ugh zug
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2012-09-06 11:37:52 UTC
ugh zug wrote:
lets think about this for a minute ccp...

you nerf high sec
anger 60% of your player base + riots
high sec subscription decrease by 30-40%
15 % additional subscription fallout due to inflation/market shortages.
ccp goes bankrupt because dust flop + sudden decline in eve subscriptions
might as well call the patch incarna 2.0; derpaggedon™

just saying, you should know who's paying your bills... and you shouldn't force people into a game play style that they clearly do not want.



ugh zug wrote:
Paul Oliver wrote:
Has anyone considered that maybe the reason some people stick to highsec isn't some skewed risk/reward mechanic but rather the kinds of people who populate low/nullsec? It seems to me a lot of people in low and null are crying for highsec to be nerfed not out of some altrustic desire to see the game improved but because they don't have enough targets because nobody wants to bother running around getting griefed and blown up by gankers, pirates, and gate camp blobs. Does that really surprise anyone?


this

Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post,1B. Remove my content from a thread I have started 2B.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#142 - 2012-09-06 11:51:19 UTC
ugh zug wrote:
lets think about this for a minute ccp...

you nerf high sec
anger 60% of your player base + riots
high sec subscription decrease by 30-40%
15 % additional subscription fallout due to inflation/market shortages.
ccp goes bankrupt because dust flop + sudden decline in eve subscriptions
might as well call the patch incarna 2.0; derpaggedon™

just saying, you should know who's paying your bills... and you shouldn't force people into a game play style that they clearly do not want.

TL/DR: "abloo bloo bloo for once something negative happened to hisec, EVERYBODY UNSUBSCRIBE""

ugh zug wrote:
Paul Oliver wrote:
Has anyone considered that maybe the reason some people stick to highsec isn't some skewed risk/reward mechanic but rather the kinds of people who populate low/nullsec? It seems to me a lot of people in low and null are crying for highsec to be nerfed not out of some altrustic desire to see the game improved but because they don't have enough targets because nobody wants to bother running around getting griefed and blown up by gankers, pirates, and gate camp blobs. Does that really surprise anyone?


this

Yeah, that, except it's wrong.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Josef Djugashvilis
#143 - 2012-09-06 11:58:32 UTC
Perhaps it would help if null sec folk posted and explained how good null is rather than simply insulting hi-sec folk.

Insulting the very folk you would like to have move to your play area has always seemed like a mistaken approach to me.

This is not a signature.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2012-09-06 12:02:36 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Perhaps it would help if null sec folk posted and explained how good null is rather than simply insulting hi-sec folk.

Insulting the very folk you would like to have move to your play area has always seemed like a mistaken approach to me.

It's almost as if we haven't been saying that nullsec isn't good enough to entice people to move there right now, and that a combination of buffing nullsec and slightly nerfing of hisec would be needed.

But just almost.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2012-09-06 12:03:10 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Rats, Roime, don't make me stop this thread. I will, if you two don't stop acting like children. I'll stop this thread right now, and you can WALK all the way back to GD.



Yes dad P

Tal

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Ghazu
#146 - 2012-09-06 12:10:48 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
The mineral prices in Null were actually pretty good until this year where a lot of people have stated to mine in Null. Unfortunately it is just a function of supply and demand. Doing as that says would destroy the economies in the rest of EvE just to give Null miners a higher reward.

So mining was already better in Null but now people have flooded the market, so you think they should be rewarded more for over supply. Strange I did not hear this view when Hi-sec residents flooded their markets.

Null needs to be fixed first and foremost by altering the rewards from the top down system to the bottom up. But this needs to be made carefully as any alterations could easily result in massive inflation or as has happened a flooding of the market.
But a corp and an alliance should live by its members not gain enough isk to go on forever if all the members left. So as I said bottom up.

As to increased income, with ring mining in the pipes I would like to see it based on the PI system for the reward levels where hi-get the least, lo about middle of the road and Null the most. Industry in Null needs an overhaul but I think that should actually be covered with the POS revamp, so if you want it you can have it if you pay.

As to the mining anoms apparently the amounts of spod need to be reduced to allow for a better profit per hour by Null miners.

Then the null sec Sov system needs an overhaul. Well scrapping completely and a full re-build.

Edit: Damn I was going to say iskies to annoy Lord ZimLol


You are missing the point that the problem with null industry is the lack of production capacity. Imagine when given equal means people in null might just begin to replace our own ships by building locally. As for tech, we may begin to see it being consumed in null manufacturing instead of being hauled to jita to be sold.

Alliances in null are already living and dying by its members. How do you think tech moons, sov, and regions are held?
We already pay sov bills what do you pay in highsec? Null industry upgrades (as in production capacity) should be like adding things to station services or put it on the ihub or whatever.
This will make holding sov more meaningful, give us the tools customize and bling it up, a new tax source for the alliances, like that vision of the farms and fields.
Give the highsec alts a reason to come home to null.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Josef Djugashvilis
#147 - 2012-09-06 12:15:47 UTC
That the game mechanics of null needs to be fixed is something that many null sec folk have been saying for quite some time.

Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

This is not a signature.
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2012-09-06 12:26:41 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

The mineral prices in Null were actually pretty good until this year where a lot of people have stated to mine in Null. Unfortunately it is just a function of supply and demand. Doing as that says would destroy the economies in the rest of EvE just to give Null miners a higher reward.


Its not mineral prices but availability. I've seen VFK prices for trit actually drop below Jita on occasion not because there is a surplus but because its all incidental minerals, stuff left over from compression or (prior to the recent patch) refined from rat drops that nobody really wants because there isn't enough of it to do serious production with. As it stands theres no reason at all to mine lowends in 0.0 when you could mine them in almost complete safety in highsec then jump them in (if you need the minerals) or mine them in highsec and just sell them there (if you need the isk). The only way to make 0.0 industry self sufficient is to provide some incentive to mine Veldspar instead, whether that be by means of a module that pulls in more ore in 0.0 or special, denser asteroids.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2012-09-06 12:39:11 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

There's more broken about the game than just "game mechanics of null", and last I checked, EVE had a lot more isk flowing into it than flowing out of it. Hisec is a huge and volumous market, with a high rate of isk throughput through a variety of different mechanisms. If CCP were to f.ex take more active care of just how much isk they take out of the economy through f.ex sales taxes, by increasing or decreasing this, then they would stand a lot more free to incentivize people into moving their moneymaking chars into nullsec. Currently, there are very, very few incentives to do so, and part of that lies in both the convenience and profitability of hisec.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

My current impression is that if I say "increase hisec taxes" or even "incentivize hisec people to move to nullsec", hisec people seem to take it as some sort of insult. vOv

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ghazu
#150 - 2012-09-06 12:47:07 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
That the game mechanics of null needs to be fixed is something that many null sec folk have been saying for quite some time.

Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

Why does it need to be nerfed? Jita. Safety and convenience all for the low low price of zero sov bills. Safety in null is provided by player interaction, in highsec it's by god mode magic NPCs.
If one day null and low gets on equal grounds on production capacity as highsec, then you carebears might just have to step up on the ship-losing to satisfy supply, hell you even might start appreciate them "griefer" corps. We in null and low may not be there to lose ships for you no more.

So come on, pay a little extra fees and sink some isk will ya?

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2012-09-06 12:49:23 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

There's more broken about the game than just "game mechanics of null", and last I checked, EVE had a lot more isk flowing into it than flowing out of it. Hisec is a huge and volumous market, with a high rate of isk throughput through a variety of different mechanisms. If CCP were to f.ex take more active care of just how much isk they take out of the economy through f.ex sales taxes, by increasing or decreasing this, then they would stand a lot more free to incentivize people into moving their moneymaking chars into nullsec. Currently, there are very, very few incentives to do so, and part of that lies in both the convenience and profitability of hisec.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

My current impression is that if I say "increase hisec taxes" or even "incentivize hisec people to move to nullsec", hisec people seem to take it as some sort of insult. vOv


Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Tal


I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Josef Djugashvilis
#152 - 2012-09-06 12:51:07 UTC
I send most of my time in hi-sec, and some in lo-sec (getting ganked often and far too easily)

I do not take any of the insults aimed at hi-sec folk on a terribly seriously, (I just wish some of them were a bit more imaginative and wittier) but it sure as heck puts me off wanting to fly with them.

Pubbie

Sperg

Aspie etc

Thanks, but no thanks.

This is not a signature.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2012-09-06 12:52:18 UTC
Rats wrote:
Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Except, and this has been said multiple times, every time CCP has tried to lure people out into nullsec or lowsec with a carrot, they've had to nerf the carrots because of the impact said carrot has on the economy. Hisec quite simply sets a way too high baseline for reward compared to effort and/or risk to allow the rest of the game to keep up.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#154 - 2012-09-06 12:59:17 UTC
Rats wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

There's more broken about the game than just "game mechanics of null", and last I checked, EVE had a lot more isk flowing into it than flowing out of it. Hisec is a huge and volumous market, with a high rate of isk throughput through a variety of different mechanisms. If CCP were to f.ex take more active care of just how much isk they take out of the economy through f.ex sales taxes, by increasing or decreasing this, then they would stand a lot more free to incentivize people into moving their moneymaking chars into nullsec. Currently, there are very, very few incentives to do so, and part of that lies in both the convenience and profitability of hisec.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

My current impression is that if I say "increase hisec taxes" or even "incentivize hisec people to move to nullsec", hisec people seem to take it as some sort of insult. vOv


Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Tal




So CCP should buff the null/low sec carrot so that people out in null are earning way more that ppl in high sec? Isn't that essentially the same as keeping null/low the same and nerfing high sec? Instead of paying 350 mil for a plex, you would end up paying 700 mil.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2012-09-06 13:03:01 UTC
Not to stomp on someone who apparently gets it, but plexes are currently 507/498,5, not 350. :P

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#156 - 2012-09-06 13:06:32 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Rats wrote:
Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Except, and this has been said multiple times, every time CCP has tried to lure people out into nullsec or lowsec with a carrot, they've had to nerf the carrots because of the impact said carrot has on the economy. Hisec quite simply sets a way too high baseline for reward compared to effort and/or risk to allow the rest of the game to keep up.


None of us have the magic wand or fix, I don't admit to knowing how to resolve the issues.


I do know that if you try to force ppl to go somewhere they don't want to go for many different reason then they won't, ,and nerfing the place they like to be and where they enjoy the game will just result in unsubs, not shifting the player base into low and nul.

The solution will probably mean lots of changes in all areas, I just don't believe making hi sec worse is the fix, at least not until a viable alternative is in place.

IMHO

Tal


I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2012-09-06 13:11:19 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Not to stomp on someone who apparently gets it, but plexes are currently 507/498,5, not 350. :P


Damn. I better log on my afk mining alt quick Shocked

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#158 - 2012-09-06 13:25:50 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Rats wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

There's more broken about the game than just "game mechanics of null", and last I checked, EVE had a lot more isk flowing into it than flowing out of it. Hisec is a huge and volumous market, with a high rate of isk throughput through a variety of different mechanisms. If CCP were to f.ex take more active care of just how much isk they take out of the economy through f.ex sales taxes, by increasing or decreasing this, then they would stand a lot more free to incentivize people into moving their moneymaking chars into nullsec. Currently, there are very, very few incentives to do so, and part of that lies in both the convenience and profitability of hisec.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

My current impression is that if I say "increase hisec taxes" or even "incentivize hisec people to move to nullsec", hisec people seem to take it as some sort of insult. vOv


Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Tal




So CCP should buff the null/low sec carrot so that people out in null are earning way more that ppl in high sec? Isn't that essentially the same as keeping null/low the same and nerfing high sec? Instead of paying 350 mil for a plex, you would end up paying 700 mil.



Not really the same at all. Currently null and low are not attractive to ppl in hi sec (for what ever reason) so making hi sec worse isn't going to make them shift to low or null. Like I said I'm sure the fix is complex and a mixture of allot of the ideas on these forums but just nerfing hi sec isn't going to do it.

Tal

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2012-09-06 13:29:07 UTC
Well we were talking specifically about isk (e.g. tax) but i agree, there needs to be more gameplay reason to be in low null other isk.

p.s glad to the the quality of your posts improving Smile

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Josef Djugashvilis
#160 - 2012-09-06 13:31:40 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Rats wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Not sure how nerfing hi-sec will fix the broken game mechanics of null.

There's more broken about the game than just "game mechanics of null", and last I checked, EVE had a lot more isk flowing into it than flowing out of it. Hisec is a huge and volumous market, with a high rate of isk throughput through a variety of different mechanisms. If CCP were to f.ex take more active care of just how much isk they take out of the economy through f.ex sales taxes, by increasing or decreasing this, then they would stand a lot more free to incentivize people into moving their moneymaking chars into nullsec. Currently, there are very, very few incentives to do so, and part of that lies in both the convenience and profitability of hisec.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
But my main point is that insulting the very group of players null sec want to move to their play area, just seems counter productive.

My current impression is that if I say "increase hisec taxes" or even "incentivize hisec people to move to nullsec", hisec people seem to take it as some sort of insult. vOv


Not an insult at all , its that increasing taxes or nerfing hi sec will not make hi sec peeps move to low or null. You can incentivise ppl to go into low with a carrot , making low and null more attractive, but you can't do it with a stick, nerfing hi sec, as that just get's ppls backs up.

Tal




So CCP should buff the null/low sec carrot so that people out in null are earning way more that ppl in high sec? Isn't that essentially the same as keeping null/low the same and nerfing high sec? Instead of paying 350 mil for a plex, you would end up paying 700 mil.



It is indeed good sir, a fair point well put.

However, there common a perception that many hi-sec folk would then quit Eve.

I personally would not quit, unless hi-sec was nerfed to the point where I could not afford to replace my ganked frigates, and I do not believe CCP would ever nerf hi-sec to anything like this level.

Perhaps CCP could try moving some of the hi-sec benefits to lo and null sec on an incremental basis until the - quitters - if indeed there are any, start to impact on CCP's profits.

This is not a signature.